CONCLUSIONES GENERALES

This section describes how exploration of the themes identified in Part 1 led to enhanced understanding of the experience of the child. This learning guided me towards subtle changes in my planning and behaviour that had a large impact on my thinking and practice.

Child Voice

Opportunities for creativity, self-directed play and autonomy were identified by all co- participants as important and led me to consider a new approach to planning. This information combined with excerpts from my reflective journal asked me to consider how I was facilitating these needs in the mainstream setting. While at infant level creativity and play is facilitated

59

through Aistear and other enquiry-based learning activities, time for choice and autonomy is sacrificed for rigid literacy and numeracy station teaching and scheduling with little time for individual choice or free play. From first class upwards, Aistear is not in operation and other play-based activities are reduced significantly. From my experience in the Nurture Group, communication and conversation flowed through choice and play periods. I recognised a need for greater balance between station teaching and opportunity for choice to create more space for the voice of the child and more equitable relationships within the classroom. Dolton et al. (2019: 432) claim that “policies and practices which do not include children’s voice will be of limited impact and benefit to children’s needs.” Likewise, Noddings (2003) criticises cluttered curricula which overlook the importance of pleasure and play in learning.

Commenting on guidelines issued from the Department of Education (2018) in the UK regarding Social Emotional Mental Health (SEMH) difficulties, Dolton et al. (2019) critique the absence of child perspective particularly that of primary school aged children. Reflecting on observations from our first nurture session, most of the conversation was teacher led and I wondered whether I had provided enough opportunity for the co-participants to speak. Consulting with my critical friend afterwards I mentioned how quickly time had passed and felt I had failed to complete everything I had planned for. I wondered how I could schedule activities more efficiently for the next session to fit everything in. However, I was reminded of previous conversations and my reflective journal in which I was concerned about bombardment of activities in the mainstream class each day with the regimented rotation of stations. I began to question whether I was giving enough time, particularly within this age group for meaningful engagement without agenda of ticking off an objective. I began to consider that perhaps during that initial session I had unconsciously placed content over connection in my rush to get everything I had planned covered. My reflective journal revealed this as a habit that has developed in my practice, undermining my values of communication and relationship

60

formation. According to hooks (2010: 45) many children feel as though their voice will not be heard, however, through the intervention of conversation, “it not only makes room for every voice, it also presupposes that all voices can be heard.” I saw a need for more flexibility in my practice and planning for my values to be realised. Our next session focused on creating opportunities for conversation by offering opportunity for choice and creativity over content and weaving my objectives into our conversations. Reflecting on our lessons, co-participants spoke and shared their thoughts most freely during story time, breakfast and choice times and by focusing on this, communication was increased. Speaking with their class teacher Child 1 said, “It’s calm and relaxing and you talk a lot about stuff”, this comment illustrates how by considering the voice of the child, my values were manifesting in my practice.

Breakfast was also reported as a Nurture Group favourite by the children. During this time, we also talked and played games. Coyne et al. (2018) acknowledge the importance and pleasure children derive from eating. When I consider the break and lunch time routine in my classroom, pupils have the opportunity to chat and I engage in conversations with them, yet mostly I am multitasking, circulating, preparing the next activities or correcting written ones. Academic “work” and administration is prioritised over communication and relationship development. This is a clear example of how I was manifesting a “living contradiction” in my practice (Whitehead, 1989 cited in Sullivan et al., 2016). I believe that pressure placed on teachers to achieve academic excellence for their students as well as to provide pastoral care results in missed opportunities for relationship development (Biesta et al., 2019). Going forward lunch time will be prioritised as an opportune time for conversation and engagement similar to Nurture Group breakfasts. This is another example of how consideration of the child’s wants and needs led to increased engagement and conversation and produced an outward manifestation of my values in my practice.

61 Belonging

Exploring the theme of belonging that arose among co-participants, I was reminded of the social pressures and demands that permeate the school day. Within the mainstream setting conversations regarding yard time mostly revolved around conflict management. After break times I began to put aside ten minutes every day to talk about yard with my mainstream class about how they were experiencing it. During this time, we discussed many social encounters both positive and negative. The children listened to each other’s experiences and I was impressed with how often they provided advice and suggested alternative responses to each other. I found this had a positive effect on how long I spent at the classroom door solving disputes spilling over from yard. I also began to do this after break in the Nurture Group during choice time. It was during this time that Child 3 would discuss her news from yard, something she would decline to do in the mainstream setting. This small timetable adjustment stimulated conversation and I was able to learn more about their social world and experience, moving from a didactic to explorative approach. Not only did this reflect my values and produce change in my professional practice, this action led to strengthening of connections between pupils and the opportunity to practice social communication skills as well as emotional expression and regulation.

Self-Identity

I was surprised at how self-conscious and self-aware the children were as they articulated their hopes for change and learning. For example, during our second nurture session I asked the group if anyone could think of a time they felt angry or frustrated. Child 1 replied “I feel like that all the time”. Sharp (2001) describes self-perception and self-image as necessary components of self-esteem which is central to the nurturing process (Kernan & Singer, 2011). I used this information as the basis of our lessons. When I considered lesson planning within the mainstream class, I would often use the academic lesson objective as a

62

starting point, consider each child’s learning ability for planning differentiation and extend from there. Within the nurture context my planning style changed as the lessons took a more exploratory stance, with fun and creativity always in mind and personal expression as the objective. I focused on the concept of ‘getting along’ in attempt to create a sense of belonging and teamwork, while also incorporating some conflict management strategies as well as those for initiating play. This was followed by resilience skills and confidence building. Empowering co-participant communication and confidence was central. I began to see a change in perspective as co-participants began to discuss their experiences and feelings more often. Recalling a conversation with Child 1 following our 5th session, his learning support teacher writes:

“I also asked him about how the Nurture Room might be helping him or helping him learn, he said it made him feel calm and not be so mad all the time.”(Learning Support Teacher, Child 1).

Here I can see an example of the positive influence this more flexible, explorative approach has had on this child’s experience of school. It also indicates a positive influence in terms of self-image.

4.4 Conclusion

The findings from the study point towards the importance of creativity, self-directed play and choice in the life of the child. They also highlight that we must acknowledge and use this perspective to inform our planning if we are to learn to understand and connect with the children in our classes. We must not only listen to the voice of the child, but consider it, then act on it. The inclusion of such methods is crucial for stimulating conversation and communication between adults and children and should not be underestimated. While feedback from parents and teachers in the study demonstrated some progress in social and emotional

63

interaction and expression both at home and at school, the disruption to nurture sessions caused by Covid-19 restrictions prevented the acquisition of more detailed exploration of how this progress came about. The study is also deprived of further insight from the lens of the co- participants themselves. From my own perspective however, following examination and reflection on the data, I was alerted to my own values and how they were manifesting in my practice. While I assert to value the importance of communication and relationships, I found that very often, opportunities for connection and meaningful conversation with my pupils were overlooked and many of the structures within my classroom as well as my own behaviour were undermining the relationships that I seek to nurture. By using this understanding and making changes to my practice and planning I began to see my practice transforming and the benefit this had for co-participants.

64

Chapter 5: Conclusions and Recommendations